When students write a report on pedagogicalpractice, they are usually strongly advised not to write that they used an authoritarian management style. Although in many situations this style is optimal, and this applies not only to teachers, but also managers of completely different levels.
Authoritarian leadership style - methodmanagement, in which almost the absolute majority of decisions are made by the leader, and the group’s contribution to leadership is minimal. Managers or educators who are prone to this method usually decide on the basis of their experience alone, trusting their judgment. Advice from the managed is practically not accepted. The authoritarian management style suggests an approach to a dictatorial level of control over the group, sometimes turning into a frankly dictatorial one.
What are the main characteristics of the described style?
First, the almost complete lack of participation by members.groups in making key decisions. But the responsibility lies with the leader, so that the infringement of the rights of some is compensated by the fact that an ordinary member of the group can avoid all responsibility. This is comfortable for so many people.
Secondly, leaders point out what shouldmade and describe in great detail the methods by which you can achieve the goal. Subordinates at the same time lose even the opportunity to prove themselves, all the awards in case of victory are received by the leader. But they are not responsible for mistakes either. The leader controls the activities at each of the steps, which implies a large contribution from his side, which is not always justified.
Third, the most difficult tasks takes onleader. He does not trust key stages of work to employees who even surpass him in qualifying, assuming that no one can cope better than him. Often this opinion is justified, only the resources of health and energy of such a leader can quickly be exhausted.
Authoritarian management style is presentedmany are not good. Does he have advantages? In some cases, it is optimal. An example is a situation where a decision should be as fast as possible, and there is no time to consult even with a small circle of people, not like with the broad masses. If there is no time to play democracy - feel free to use an authoritarian leadership style. And this style was adopted in the army because there was no time to confer in battle.
It is very difficult to use a liberal style inamong people who are not inclined to creativity and responsibility. Perhaps you, the reader, have experience when promising projects have failed due to the inaction of the leader. A good leader distributes tasks and assigns tight deadlines. In a situation of severely limited resources, people tend to strive to get under the influence of a “strong hand”.
As we mentioned, the authoritarian stylecontrol is optimal in the army, especially during military conflicts. The fact is that it is easier for people in this situation to focus on performing specific actions when strategic aspects trust the leader so as not to ponder painfully on every action.
Of course, this style is far from ideal, and notit should be applied constantly and in all situations. In so many ways, he is a bad influence on group members. And the image of the leader suffers. Abused by this method of leadership is perceived by the team as inclined to constantly command, control, not trust their people. Therefore, among the members of such a group can gradually ripen rebellion.
Since the opinion of the group members is notlisten, many opportunities are lost. And people feel frustrated and insecure in their abilities, some depression. Therefore, leaders of this style can be appointed only temporarily, to carry out very important projects, and then give the group a rest and recuperate.
